Dark Souls - I'm Prepared To Die (Again)

[Dalisclock]

I was wondering OP. Are you planning to go after another Dark Souls game after you beat this one? If so, I suggest flat out ignoring Dark Souls 2. The story has almost no connection with the other games and reads more like fanfiction than a proper continuation of the story. This is probably because the lead director of the game was opposed to making it a Dark Souls game and From Software had to wrest control from him and give it to someone else who had to try and salvage the game into a playable Dark Souls state. It's not necessarily a bad game but it lacks the sparkle and amazing world that made Dark Souls what it was. Bloodbone and Dark Souls 3 on the other hand do capture that zing, Bloodborne's early levels have that same looping shortcut system that makes DS1's world feel open and interconnected and Dark Souls 3 has much of the same even if at times it feels more like a linear quest than the free roaming exploration of DS1. I'd heavily suggest just skipping Dark Souls 2 entirely and playing Dark Souls 3 instead, you'd have a lot more fun with it and you would probably have less headscratching questions about the lore that DS2 tries to shovel at you (Seriously, in Scholar of the First Sin they just flat out gave up and tried to tell you what's going on instead of letting the world teach you like DS1 did).

I'm playing DS2: SotFS right now and am a decent amount of the way through(Demons is on hiatus for reasons). I don't think it's a bad game by any means, but it does feel very fan-fiction-y as opposed to a true sequel. That and it's like the creators of DS2 just went "Okay, so if we give them more areas, more invasions, more dress up options, more ways to get horribly pissed off, that's what they want, right?"

The level design in 2 is particulary off putting at times. The individual levels aren't bad, but the whole path to the lost Bastille feels....off(No Man's wharf feels like it should be underwater) and then there's the infamous elevator ride from Earthen Peak to Iron Keep. Yeah. That was wierd. Not to mention the perspective of landmarks from Majula vs. the actual distance feels really really not to scale.

Honestly, it's like Dranlegic doesn't even try to pretend this all fits together in a coherent way. If it was mentioned somewhere that time and space are all twisty turny there, I'd probably appreciate it a bit more. Instead there's just that wierd-ass intro thing with the freaky portal in the lake which is never really explained.

So I'll play through DS2 for the sake of completion(and even then I'm skipping areas I don't have to complete. Belfy Luna can kiss my ass, you crazy midget freaks), but once I finish it, I don't anticipate ever coming back to it.

The only reason I'm not playing DS3 right now is because I'm waiting for the "Complete" edition to drop(probably next year) and Bloodborne going to the first thing on my list when I get a PS4.

 

[Xprimentyl]

I'm going through all the games on PS because I'm a bit of a trophy whore, and my entertainment setup is better suited to it. I do have DS: PTD on PC though, and with the DSFix patch and DS4windows it plays very well even on my older rig, all things considered.

Pretty surprised to hear DS3 getting praise in here though. According to most feedback I've heard/read it was even a bigger letdown than DS2, but for different reasons.

I often wonder how differently these games would rate if the release order was switched around.

 

[Xprimentyl]

Dark Souls bosses are always a matter of practice. One of the best things you can do is to spend at least one fight just learning the moveset, focussing on avoiding his moves and not trying to get attacks in. If you die, it doesn't matter, the whole purpose is not to kill the boss, but to perfect your blocking and dodging so that when you get to your final run you have many less problems.

There's an optional boss in DS3 who has some really bullshit moves like Special K. The Nameless King is a brutal boss who flies around and does all sorts of ranged and smashing attacks like Special K does, he's a pain in the ass to fight. But, after a few goes and then a break, a friend and I came back to that fight and we aced it. And I quote "When did this boss become easy?".

Sadly, my friends and guides, my beating Kalameet wasn't meant to be. I tried and tried and tried; we can sugar-coat it and call it "practice," but I know it was the textbook definition of insanity; I had to concede for NG. Maybe I can beat Kalameet in NG+ when he's even stronger and has more health. See that there? My brain is so damaged from beating it against the Kalameet brick wall, that logic actually makes sense to me. So, with everyone I could kill dead and my NG clean-up basically done, I said my goodbyes to the Lordran I'd basically picked clean to the bare bones over the course of over +90 hours and set my sights on the Kiln of the First Flame...

Gwyn, the tragic husk of the once mighty Lord of Cinder, is no more, and with him ends the Age of Fire as I turned my back to the dwindling Flame and walked away...​

That also ends my first playthrough of Dark Souls!! What an amazing ride it's been; I'm really sorry I put off experiencing this game for as long as I did. To any and all of you who advised me along the way, my sincerest thanks and deepest appreciation; Lordran can be a cold, lonely and unforgiving place; what a great asset it was to have your shared wisdom to fall back on. You folks are AWESOME!!!

I was wondering OP. Are you planning to go after another Dark Souls game after you beat this one? If so, I suggest flat out ignoring Dark Souls 2. The story has almost no connection with the other games and reads more like fanfiction than a proper continuation of the story. This is probably because the lead director of the game was opposed to making it a Dark Souls game and From Software had to wrest control from him and give it to someone else who had to try and salvage the game into a playable Dark Souls state. It's not necessarily a bad game but it lacks the sparkle and amazing world that made Dark Souls what it was. Bloodbone and Dark Souls 3 on the other hand do capture that zing, Bloodborne's early levels have that same looping shortcut system that makes DS1's world feel open and interconnected and Dark Souls 3 has much of the same even if at times it feels more like a linear quest than the free roaming exploration of DS1. I'd heavily suggest just skipping Dark Souls 2 entirely and playing Dark Souls 3 instead, you'd have a lot more fun with it and you would probably have less headscratching questions about the lore that DS2 tries to shovel at you (Seriously, in Scholar of the First Sin they just flat out gave up and tried to tell you what's going on instead of letting the world teach you like DS1 did).

I'd recommend Bloodborne or Demon Soul's as well, once you've thoroughly explored DS1. Of course, you may also want to give New Game Plus a shot.

Also, OP may not have a PS4. In that case, Demon Soul's is the way to go.

Oh, rest assured, I jumped directly into NG+; I was back at Firelink within 4 minutes of the NG credits rolling!! Knowing that not only is Lordran reset and "refilled," but thanks to all of you folks, I?m so much wiser this time, I couldn't put off starting right away.

And yes, I most certainly plan on playing another Souls game. This isn't the first time I've seeing warnings against DS2, so if I can see some consensus that there?s nothing to be missed skipping it, I'll likely go right into DS3. I don't have a PS4, so Bloodbourne is out for the time being, but I DO have a PS3, so Demon?s Souls is another candidate.

 

[Xprimentyl]

I was wondering OP. Are you planning to go after another Dark Souls game after you beat this one? If so, I suggest flat out ignoring Dark Souls 2. The story has almost no connection with the other games and reads more like fanfiction than a proper continuation of the story. This is probably because the lead director of the game was opposed to making it a Dark Souls game and From Software had to wrest control from him and give it to someone else who had to try and salvage the game into a playable Dark Souls state. It's not necessarily a bad game but it lacks the sparkle and amazing world that made Dark Souls what it was. Bloodbone and Dark Souls 3 on the other hand do capture that zing, Bloodborne's early levels have that same looping shortcut system that makes DS1's world feel open and interconnected and Dark Souls 3 has much of the same even if at times it feels more like a linear quest than the free roaming exploration of DS1. I'd heavily suggest just skipping Dark Souls 2 entirely and playing Dark Souls 3 instead, you'd have a lot more fun with it and you would probably have less headscratching questions about the lore that DS2 tries to shovel at you (Seriously, in Scholar of the First Sin they just flat out gave up and tried to tell you what's going on instead of letting the world teach you like DS1 did).

I never knew those details. I wonder what, if those same people are still there think now that he's heading the studio. It's kind of a shame that he didn't have complete control of the whole series. I suppose every IP has an odd duckling of sorts. I'm still looking forward to playing 2, if nothing other than experiencing the contrast of ideas. I figure I'll either enjoy what DS2 excels at (which seems to be gameplay, increased content and viable builds), or at the very least appreciate a return to form when I play 3.

 

[iwinatlife]

See despite DS2 being the lesser game I think the true experience is to play them all

 

[Dalisclock]

I've only played 1 and like 25% of 2(I'm not sure what it's considered if you have 1 of the great souls and just need to beat the boss to get the 2nd). Oh, and part of demons.

Demons feels a lot more like DS then DS2. In fact, it feels very much like DS 0.5. Not as tight and so parts feel a lot harder then they should(that fucking dragon bridge) but still very DS. Though I didn't get very far before I put it on hold.

DS2 is not a bad game, but it feels very....sequal-y. Not so much in plot, which is very detached from the first game, but everything else feels like "Like the first one, but more". There are a few mechanic changes, and they seem to be equal parts good and bad, though the bad bits aren't are bad as I feared(Weapons degrade faster because your weapons auto restore at bonfires and bonfires are a lot more plentiful. I've yet to have a weapon break from overusing it in 25 hours).

Not to mention the weirdness of the levels. Aside from the fact they don't really flow into each other very well half the time, there are bits that either feel like they really cribbed from DS(I feel like I've been back to Anor Londo twice now) or just very "video gamey"(Looking at you Iron Keep).

 

[Xprimentyl]

See despite DS2 being the lesser game I think the true experience is to play them all

Right now, NG+ in DS1 is my immediate focus, but I most likely will eventually play DS2, just after DS3.

 

[Xprimentyl]

I've only played 1 and like 25% of 2(I'm not sure what it's considered if you have 1 of the great souls and just need to beat the boss to get the 2nd). Oh, and part of demons.

Demons feels a lot more like DS then DS2. In fact, it feels very much like DS 0.5. Not as tight and so parts feel a lot harder then they should(that fucking dragon bridge) but still very DS. Though I didn't get very far before I put it on hold.

DS2 is not a bad game, but it feels very....sequal-y. Not so much in plot, which is very detached from the first game, but everything else feels like "Like the first one, but more". There are a few mechanic changes, and they seem to be equal parts good and bad, though the bad bits aren't are bad as I feared(Weapons degrade faster because your weapons auto restore at bonfires and bonfires are a lot more plentiful. I've yet to have a weapon break from overusing it in 25 hours).

Not to mention the weirdness of the levels. Aside from the fact they don't really flow into each other very well half the time, there are bits that either feel like they really cribbed from DS(I feel like I've been back to Anor Londo twice now) or just very "video gamey"(Looking at you Iron Keep).

In regards to the nonsensical level design and disconnected lore, From could've just pulled a Dallas season 9 and said that DS2 was "all just a dream" lol.

 

[Xprimentyl]

Also, if you need more motivation, check out some of the souls music and AMVs out there:


P.S. Gwyn can be parried. He's a giant enemy crab, parry his weakpoint for massive damage.

I wonder why that video is rated so low...I get the music might not be the best fit, but it's far from unwatchable.

I forgot to thank you for this video; beautiful! And I?ll disagree, hanselthecartaker; I think the music fits perfectly. The singer has a wonderful voice, the score is as epic as the game merits, and I?m not a big lyrics person generally, but I?d be surprised if those words weren?t written with Dark Souls in mind!

Anyway, NG+ was going swimmingly: killed the Asylum Demon during the first encounter, I jumped directly on the Black Knight and Havel in the Undead Burg with breaking a sweat, the Taurus Demon (my brick wall 3 years ago) might as well have not even bothered trying to stop me, etc. I was king of the world, and I got cocky? the Capra Demon one-shotted me, and reality set in: this is still Dark Souls, ************! New Game PLUS! If you thought this was gonna be a breeze, you best to take a big whiff of that air. Smell that? That?s yo? ass on the barbecue, and we plan on EATIN?!

I?m Prepared to Die (Again) ((AGAIN))​

 

[Xprimentyl]

Yeah I'm on + now too cleaning up the last trophies. Anticipating to get stomped somewhere between Demon Ruins and Catacombs. I have a problem though...


























I started Bloodborne in earnest and it dug its hooks into me like a...well, let's just say there is no suitable frame of reference. I will hopefully have time to pick up my new receiver today, and break it in on the Cleric Beast fight at a sonic output that approaches "blood curdling."

 

[Dalisclock]

I've only played 1 and like 25% of 2(I'm not sure what it's considered if you have 1 of the great souls and just need to beat the boss to get the 2nd). Oh, and part of demons.

Demons feels a lot more like DS then DS2. In fact, it feels very much like DS 0.5. Not as tight and so parts feel a lot harder then they should(that fucking dragon bridge) but still very DS. Though I didn't get very far before I put it on hold.

DS2 is not a bad game, but it feels very....sequal-y. Not so much in plot, which is very detached from the first game, but everything else feels like "Like the first one, but more". There are a few mechanic changes, and they seem to be equal parts good and bad, though the bad bits aren't are bad as I feared(Weapons degrade faster because your weapons auto restore at bonfires and bonfires are a lot more plentiful. I've yet to have a weapon break from overusing it in 25 hours).

Not to mention the weirdness of the levels. Aside from the fact they don't really flow into each other very well half the time, there are bits that either feel like they really cribbed from DS(I feel like I've been back to Anor Londo twice now) or just very "video gamey"(Looking at you Iron Keep).

In regards to the nonsensical level design and disconnected lore, From could've just pulled a Dallas season 9 and said that DS2 was "all just a dream" lol.

Didn't DS3 more or less do that by barely referencing anything from DS2? I haven't played DS3 but I've heard that several times that DS2 is barely acknowledged.

 

[vallorn]

I've only played 1 and like 25% of 2(I'm not sure what it's considered if you have 1 of the great souls and just need to beat the boss to get the 2nd). Oh, and part of demons.

Demons feels a lot more like DS then DS2. In fact, it feels very much like DS 0.5. Not as tight and so parts feel a lot harder then they should(that fucking dragon bridge) but still very DS. Though I didn't get very far before I put it on hold.

DS2 is not a bad game, but it feels very....sequal-y. Not so much in plot, which is very detached from the first game, but everything else feels like "Like the first one, but more". There are a few mechanic changes, and they seem to be equal parts good and bad, though the bad bits aren't are bad as I feared(Weapons degrade faster because your weapons auto restore at bonfires and bonfires are a lot more plentiful. I've yet to have a weapon break from overusing it in 25 hours).

Not to mention the weirdness of the levels. Aside from the fact they don't really flow into each other very well half the time, there are bits that either feel like they really cribbed from DS(I feel like I've been back to Anor Londo twice now) or just very "video gamey"(Looking at you Iron Keep).

In regards to the nonsensical level design and disconnected lore, From could've just pulled a Dallas season 9 and said that DS2 was "all just a dream" lol.

Didn't DS3 more or less do that by barely referencing anything from DS2? I haven't played DS3 but I've heard that several times that DS2 is barely acknowledged.

A few armour sets reference DS2's events in a longwinded manner but yeah, aside from, that, DS2 is mostly forgotten, and goof riddance too.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

A few armour sets reference DS2's events in a longwinded manner but yeah, aside from, that, DS2 is mostly forgotten, and goof riddance too.

I think that might actually work in the series' favor in a way. Since it is so separate from DS1, and so vaguely connected, you only need to ignore a few (optional, mind you) lines of dialogue referencing "countless kingdoms rising and falling on this very spot", and the stuff at the end about linking the fire, to treat Drangleic like Balder from DS1: an entirely different kingdom that merely fell to the undead curse. Since the dialogue in the game references kings and rulers much more than the undead curse or linking the fire, one can easily build a headcanon where Drangleic is locked in an endless, ultimately pointless king of the hill style power struggle about who gets to be king. That way it's easier to think of Dark Souls II as a sort of spinoff rather than a numbered installment. Or a sequel in the final fantasy sense: sharing names, gameplay, themes and concepts, but little else.

 

[iwinatlife]

To me I thought the whole point DS2 was making was that in the end nothing you were doing could ever matter.
The story of kings rising and falling and railing against the hopelessness of the cycle of Linking the Fire.

Spoiler

Even the Scholar ending is just you walking way which inevitably leads to another chosen undead linking the fire. However my headcanon says the scholar ending leads to your character going to help create what becomes the sable church as a way to truly end the age of fire. Making Usurping the flame ending canon for me.

 

[Dalisclock]

A few armour sets reference DS2's events in a longwinded manner but yeah, aside from, that, DS2 is mostly forgotten, and goof riddance too.

I think that might actually work in the series' favor in a way. Since it is so separate from DS1, and so vaguely connected, you only need to ignore a few (optional, mind you) lines of dialogue referencing "countless kingdoms rising and falling on this very spot", and the stuff at the end about linking the fire, to treat Drangleic like Balder from DS1: an entirely different kingdom that merely fell to the undead curse. Since the dialogue in the game references kings and rulers much more than the undead curse or linking the fire, one can easily build a headcanon where Drangleic is locked in an endless, ultimately pointless king of the hill style power struggle about who gets to be king. That way it's easier to think of Dark Souls II as a sort of spinoff rather than a numbered installment. Or a sequel in the final fantasy sense: sharing names, gameplay, themes and concepts, but little else.

Yeah, I've seen a lot of insistence by some people that Danglegic is on the same spot Lordran used to be on and as cool as that idea is, the geography works against it. Especially the theory that the lost bastille is the Northern Undead Asylum, which might work except for the fact that the Asylum was at the top of a fucking mountain and the lost Bastille was smack dab on the coast. Even with magic shit invovled, there's enough geographical difference there to make them both being the same building problematic.

The problem is, DS2 is so vague about it's connection to DS1 that trying to tie much of anything other then the great souls to anything in DS1 involves a lot of theory and conjecture(and even the great soul thing is iffy, because technically there should be 3 great souls, not 4). The only concrete connection we really have is the lordvessal in the basement of majula, but since there's no context given it might as well be an easter egg.

DS3 at least has the excuse that the bonds of reality starting to unravel as the world is reaching exhaustion from old age, so geographical weirdness and locations being shoved together can be lampshaded a bit.

 

[Xprimentyl]

A few armour sets reference DS2's events in a longwinded manner but yeah, aside from, that, DS2 is mostly forgotten, and goof riddance too.

I think that might actually work in the series' favor in a way. Since it is so separate from DS1, and so vaguely connected, you only need to ignore a few (optional, mind you) lines of dialogue referencing "countless kingdoms rising and falling on this very spot", and the stuff at the end about linking the fire, to treat Drangleic like Balder from DS1: an entirely different kingdom that merely fell to the undead curse. Since the dialogue in the game references kings and rulers much more than the undead curse or linking the fire, one can easily build a headcanon where Drangleic is locked in an endless, ultimately pointless king of the hill style power struggle about who gets to be king. That way it's easier to think of Dark Souls II as a sort of spinoff rather than a numbered installment. Or a sequel in the final fantasy sense: sharing names, gameplay, themes and concepts, but little else.

Good way of putting it, and that's really for the best considering it was made/led by a different team.

 

[iwinatlife]

Yeah, I've seen a lot of insistence by some people that Danglegic is on the same spot Lordran used to be on and as cool as that idea is, the geography works against it. Especially the theory that the lost bastille is the Northern Undead Asylum, which might work except for the fact that the Asylum was at the top of a fucking mountain and the lost Bastille was smack dab on the coast. Even with magic shit invovled, there's enough geographical difference there to make them both being the same building problematic.

The problem is, DS2 is so vague about it's connection to DS1 that trying to tie much of anything other then the great souls to anything in DS1 involves a lot of theory and conjecture(and even the great soul thing is iffy, because technically there should be 3 great souls, not 4). The only concrete connection we really have is the lordvessal in the basement of majula, but since there's no context given it might as well be an easter egg.

DS3 at least has the excuse that the bonds of reality starting to unravel as the world is reaching exhaustion from old age, so geographical weirdness and locations being shoved together can be lampshaded a bit.

See I think Dranglegic being on the site of Lordran makes sense. Because Thousands of years of War and death magic and all kinds of other terribleness has happened so I feel that its a wheel of Time sort of thing.

The First Flame burns and Kingdoms Rise and fall leaving memory that fades to legend, legend fades to myth and even myth is long forgotten when the flame that gave it birth burns again. (this is a butchered segment of the opening lines to all 14 wheel of time books for those who don't know)

The similarities are caused by the strength of the lord souls that continue to provide their bearers with the same powers and traits of the previous bearers.

Spoiler

Kind of like the Soul of Cinder is the amalgamation of those who linked the fire in the past.

If anything is weird time and location wise it would be

Spoiler

the literal Anor Londo in DS3

 

[Dalisclock]

The similarities are caused by the strength of the lord souls that continue to provide their bearers with the same powers and traits of the previous bearers.

Spoiler

Kind of like the Soul of Cinder is the amalgamation of those who linked the fire in the past.

The problem being that seethe never had a great soul. He had a fraction of Gywn's, as did the 4 Kings. Somehow combining those was just enough to make up for Gwyns soul not being there(and being able to go after 4 souls instead of just 2), but it doesn't work quite as well as an "inherited" thing for this reason. Among other things, it raises the question "So why aren't there 5, because the 4 kings soul should be included too?".

It all kind of feels like the DS2 people were trying to make another DS1 without really realizing what made DS1 work, which is why you see a fair number of things in 2 which feels like they either imitated or combined bit from DS1(The Gutter being blighttown but with the darkness of Tomb of the Giants, the first part of Iron Keep feeling supiciously like Anor Londo, down to the annoying as shit archers).And of course, this time we have a lady with a SCORPION for an ass.

 

[Xprimentyl]

And something to remind OP of the other fun part of Anor Londo

NG+ is going swimmingly, but had to share that I finally made it back to my best friends in Anor Londo in NG+? was certainly feeling...

Fortunately, it only took me TWO tries to get passed them, but my hands were shaking and my heart was racing like nobody's business; it was pathetic. I think this part of the game gave me PTSD...

 

[vallorn]

It still only took two tries. That's something that happens with Dark Souls, for most of the traps and areas once you beat them once you really don't have the same problems with them. Blighttown on the other hand never does get much easier.